Re: [native-lang] Change in Lead

Hi Charles, et al.,

On 2010-10-18, at 05:37 , Charles-H. Schulz wrote:

> Louis,
>=20
>=20
> Le Thu, 14 Oct 2010 15:32:28 -0400,
> Louis Su=E1rez-Potts <[email protected]> a =E9crit :
>=20
>>=20
>> All,
>> I have asked that Charles Schulz recuse himself from his role as lead
>> of the NLC category because of the confusion his new role outside of
>> OpenOffice.org would produce in the minds of contributors and users.
>> I have not received an answer, so I must presume one, that he would
>> act with good grace and recognize the impossibility of his dual =
roles.
>=20
>=20
> I am afraid you are presuming the wrong way.=20

I'm sorry to read that.=20


> I am sorry not to have given you an answer earlier publicly, but I am
> not going away.

? I didn't ask you to. I asked you to recuse yourself from lead=97that =
is to suspend, temporarily, the duties and title associated with your =
office=97because of the evident conflict of interest your concurrent =
role as NLC lead and TDF founder presents. I did not, and have not, =
removed your privileges as lead. Check if you are uncertain. But I do =
feel, even more, that your current dual roles seriously compromises the =
legitimacy by which you can effect your OOo role.


> Your takeover of my position is simply not right, does

Hm.

> not match any of our guidelines and implies a lot of nebulous things:
> confusion with my new role? Please define why my new role would
> confuse the OpenOffice.org community. I think my new role is quite
> clear; the fact that I will eventually leave, on my own accord and
> terms should also be clear.=20

I think I've clarified the source of confusion, the effects, too, =
enough. Your post to the dev@nlc list asking (urging?) members to make =
further contributions to TDF and LO clearly violated the implicit tenets =
of our project, and demonstrated a clear conflict of interest. It's as =
if a big competitor visited our project, got on our lists, and told =
everyone to go to MuddleSoft instead of OOo. Wouldn't think it right, =
would you?=20

>=20
> Louis, I am not employed by Oracle: you cannot "fire" me nor anyone
> like you're trying to do. This is extravagant and outlines a deep
> misunderstanding of community "management". =20

I have not fired you, nor anyone, nor do I have that right, thankfully. =
The CC can, of course, remove people. But what I did, and did only, was =
to assume your duties presuming a positive answer to my question. As =
you've answered in the negative, and you are still lead, this does =
complicate things a little, and it is something of course, that would =
and will be, I have no doubt, brought up in the CC meeting next. =
Charles, no one here in OOo is acting arbitrarily or without =
accountability. We are interested in demonstrating to the community that =
what we do is in their behalf, and that as a community, we act in a way =
that is neither precipitous or irrational, but which has the OOo project =
community's interests at heart=97and that community includes those =
interested in using OOo in all environments.

Put another way: Trust is crucial here. And trust, we have been taught =
by Foss, is the keystone upon which community is built. Trust is built =
up by predictable behaviour, by verifiable doings: by intentions =
manifest in actions whose is evident and not the arbitrary writing of a =
child who might declare himself one day to be superman just because he =
wants to.


>>=20
>> As lead I will continue to do what I normally do as the co-lead of
>> the NLC=97the admin, policy, outreach=97plus the engagement of new
>> members interested in setting up projects in their native language.
>> Only, I'll do this now as Lead of the category. (There is no real
>> apparatus for formal vote here=85.)
>=20
> There might not be any, but I'd be interested to know what other think
> about both the legitimity of your move, let alone of its legality.=20

Of what move? To assume your duties during a time when you've clearly =
demonstrated that you are perfectly intent on misusing the privileges =
and authority of your office? To ask you to recuse yourself (temporary =
suspension)? To ensure the integrity and health of OpenOffice.org, the =
project, its community?=20

Let's put it this way. What do you gain by trying so hard to weaken the =
trust people have in OpenOffice.org? What did you gain by working with =
the media as you have? (I don't mean, of course, what you, Charles, the =
person gained; I mean the plural you. I do not imagine you to be so =
venal or egotistical as to seek personal gain here alone.)

For I feel and believe that the supposed gains made by TDF and LO by =
doing what they have and are doing comes at a terrible price.=20

Here, on our tenth anniversary, a moment of triumph the community can =
and should relish, when tens of millions use the application because of =
the community's efforts, we see a group led by current and former leads =
of OpenOffice.org assert identity over the entire OpenOffice.org =
community and declare their own brand and project=97and then urge all =
those remnants, I suppose you'd call them, to leave OpenOffice.org and =
join them in their endeavour. (Nevermind that no one seriously thinks =
that TDF or LO has the necessary resources to satisfy enterprise-level =
customers in the future. If saying so can make a community then saying =
so can make code appear, no?)



>=20
>>=20
>> And there is a fair amount that does need to be done, as OOo is
>> gaining enormous momentum around the world and as you, the NLC
>> projects, are elemental to that!=20
>=20
> Sorry Louis, no pun intended, but... who are you talking about? This =
is
> becoming pathetic.
Hm,=20
What is, Charles? What I find oddly disturbing, aside from your =
hostility=97I think we have all done a rather decent job of refraining =
from hostile attacks, and that's good=97is that TDF is simply not =
recognizing that it serves different interests from OpenOffice.org. Of =
course there is overlap. And of course TDF and LO contributors can work =
on both projects. But doing so in a way that instils trust and =
expectation is the point, and the first step, don't you think, is to =
admit, to accept that you represent, now, TDF and LO over =
OpenOffice.org, and that they are different entities, albeit with =
overlap.  (We are all members of overlapping communities; that's a =
nothing new.)

>=20
> Charles-H. Schulz.=20
>=20

best
louis